5 ms·

If people took a minute to put their phones away and looked around once in a while, they’d notice that males and females tend to self-segregate, with the vast m

If people took a minute to put their phones away and looked around once in a while, they’d notice that males and females tend to self-segregate, with the vast majority of each gender spending time only with others of their own gender. This behaviour is constant in schools, parties, coffee shops, you name it. I’ve traveled extensively around the world, and I’ve observed the same patterns everywhere. Males and females lead drastically different lives. People act as if voicing these observations out loud automatically places you in the ‘incel’ category.

pavlov 2y ago
> “People act as if voicing these observations out loud automatically places you in the ‘incel’ category.” Quite the strawman. Does anybody claim that? Women would certainly agree that social circles everywhere tend to be genderized. And part of the reason is a vicious cycle: men are not used to spending time with women, so they easily misunderstand the situation and get sexual or romantic ideas that are not reciprocated. And having to sort out this unwanted attention and the resulting emotions makes women even less likely to want to spend time with men. There’s a reason why “the gay best friend” is a trope in American fiction featuring women. It’s not because gays are feminine — it’s because they don’t bombard women with their unprocessed feelings. If you want to fix the situation, stop rambling about incels and start thinking of ways to get boys and girls to spend more time together at all ages. American parents still seem to tend to treat boys and girls as separate species.
- runsWphotons 2y ago
  What?
portaouflop 2y ago
What is your point in relation to the article? How would gender self-segregation be related to __rising__ rates of singledom?
- potato3732842 2y ago
  I think the point he was getting at but failed to come around to was that men and women are different enough they don't actually want to spend time together all that much and historically just put up with it because of social pressure to get on the life path to raising a family and lack of access to casual sex. Sure, there's some mutual interests there that'll get them hanging out together but it's pretty minor overall. There's no big reason for a man who's gotten good at online dating or a women who doesn't actively want kids to date seriously or settle down unless they just happen to run across someone who's perfect for them and wants to lock it in.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >historically just put up with it because of social pressure to get on the life path to raising a family and lack of access to casual sex. For women it was also a fundamental question of literally living. Back when women were expected to be full-time housewives, women had to marry to quite literally not starve to death on the streets. The advancement of gender equality to bring men and women, all mankind, to the same level of freedom and authority has undoubtedly played a significant role in the decline of romance and marriage.
    - mike_hearn 2y ago
      That's a pretty odd take on history. You know women have always worked, right? Female life pre-20th century wasn't permanent housewifeing. They often worked from home in cottage industries, ran shops, took part in family owned businesses (often running the financial side) and many other jobs. The reason there was pressure to raise a family - for both women and men - had nothing to do with gender equality. It was because there was no welfare state so people relied on their families and extended families to take care of them in old age and sickness.
      - portaouflop 2y ago
        The pressure to produce more humans was mostly to fuel the armies that need constant supply of young people to throw into the meat grinder; at least in the past centuries in Europe
strobeflier 2y ago
I don’t know about “vast majority”. Mixed-gender friend groups are also very common, especially in larger metros. The two cultural shifts currently happening are 1. Loss of interest in “third spaces” (clubs, church) for mingling and 2. widening political divide between the genders.
runsWphotons 2y ago
Why is this flagged?

pavlov 2y ago

> “People act as if voicing these observations out loud automatically places you in the ‘incel’ category.” Quite the strawman. Does anybody claim that? Women would certainly agree that social circles everywhere tend to be genderized. And part of the reason is a vicious cycle: men are not used to spending time with women, so they easily misunderstand the situation and get sexual or romantic ideas that are not reciprocated. And having to sort out this unwanted attention and the resulting emotions makes women even less likely to want to spend time with men. There’s a reason why “the gay best friend” is a trope in American fiction featuring women. It’s not because gays are feminine — it’s because they don’t bombard women with their unprocessed feelings. If you want to fix the situation, stop rambling about incels and start thinking of ways to get boys and girls to spend more time together at all ages. American parents still seem to tend to treat boys and girls as separate species.

runsWphotons 2y ago
What?

portaouflop 2y ago

What is your point in relation to the article? How would gender self-segregation be related to __rising__ rates of singledom?

potato3732842 2y ago
I think the point he was getting at but failed to come around to was that men and women are different enough they don't actually want to spend time together all that much and historically just put up with it because of social pressure to get on the life path to raising a family and lack of access to casual sex. Sure, there's some mutual interests there that'll get them hanging out together but it's pretty minor overall. There's no big reason for a man who's gotten good at online dating or a women who doesn't actively want kids to date seriously or settle down unless they just happen to run across someone who's perfect for them and wants to lock it in.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >historically just put up with it because of social pressure to get on the life path to raising a family and lack of access to casual sex. For women it was also a fundamental question of literally living. Back when women were expected to be full-time housewives, women had to marry to quite literally not starve to death on the streets. The advancement of gender equality to bring men and women, all mankind, to the same level of freedom and authority has undoubtedly played a significant role in the decline of romance and marriage.
  - mike_hearn 2y ago
    That's a pretty odd take on history. You know women have always worked, right? Female life pre-20th century wasn't permanent housewifeing. They often worked from home in cottage industries, ran shops, took part in family owned businesses (often running the financial side) and many other jobs. The reason there was pressure to raise a family - for both women and men - had nothing to do with gender equality. It was because there was no welfare state so people relied on their families and extended families to take care of them in old age and sickness.
    - portaouflop 2y ago
      The pressure to produce more humans was mostly to fuel the armies that need constant supply of young people to throw into the meat grinder; at least in the past centuries in Europe

strobeflier 2y ago

I don’t know about “vast majority”. Mixed-gender friend groups are also very common, especially in larger metros. The two cultural shifts currently happening are 1. Loss of interest in “third spaces” (clubs, church) for mingling and 2. widening political divide between the genders.

runsWphotons 2y ago

Why is this flagged?